FAAR vs FTGS
FAAR vs FTGS
First Trust Alternative Absolute Return Strategy ETF vs First Trust Growth Strength ETF
Quick Verdict
FTGS has a lower expense ratio. FAAR delivered stronger 1-year returns. FTGS offers more diversification with 50 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | FAAR | FTGS | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.97% | 0.60% | |
| AUM | $191M | $1.3B | |
| Dividend Yield | 9.19% | 0.09% | |
| Holdings | 6 | 51 | |
| YTD Return | +13.94% | +12.49% | |
| 1Y Return | +19.26% | +14.75% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +8.78% | +18.25% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +7.33% | - | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 9.2% | 14.6% | |
| Max Drawdown | -18.8% | -20.0% | |
| Fund Family | First Trust Portfolios (US) | First Trust Portfolios (US) | |
| Category | Commodity | Equity | |
| Inception | May 18, 2016 | Oct 25, 2022 |
FAAR vs FTGS Performance
First Trust Alternative Absolute Return Strategy ETF (FAAR) is a ETF from First Trust Portfolios (US) and First Trust Growth Strength ETF (FTGS) is a ETF from First Trust Portfolios (US). Over the past year FAAR returned +19.26% while FTGS returned +14.75%. Year to date, FAAR is up 13.94% versus a gain of 12.49% for FTGS.
Over three years, FAAR compounded at +8.78% per year against +18.25% for FTGS. Across the full 4-year window we track, FTGS has the edge at +19.84% annualized vs +3.32%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
FTGS has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 14.6% compared with 9.2% for FAAR. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -18.8% for FAAR and -20.0% for FTGS. Drawdown depth is worth weighing if you expect to sell during market stress rather than ride it out.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at -0.14. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
FAAR charges 0.97% per year while FTGS charges 0.60%. On a $10,000 position that is $97 vs $60 annually, a gap of $37 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, FAAR currently yields 9.19% against 0.09% for FTGS.
Holdings Overlap
FAAR and FTGS share 0 holdings out of 51 unique holdings combined, representing a 0.0% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, FAAR or FTGS?
FAAR has an expense ratio of 0.97% while FTGS charges 0.60%. FTGS is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $37 per year of difference.
Which performed better, FAAR or FTGS?
Over the past year FAAR returned +19.26% vs +14.75% for FTGS, so FAAR leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (4 years), FAAR annualized +3.32% vs +19.84% for FTGS. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, FAAR or FTGS?
FTGS has been the more volatile fund at 14.6% annualized versus 9.2% for FAAR. Worst drawdown: FAAR -18.8% vs FTGS -20.0%.
Should I hold both FAAR and FTGS?
FAAR and FTGS have a monthly-return correlation of -0.14, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between FAAR and FTGS?
FAAR and FTGS share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 51 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, FAAR or FTGS?
FAAR yields 9.19% while FTGS yields 0.09%, so FAAR currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Popular ETF Comparisons
Get Full ETF Analytics
Access complete holdings data, overlap analysis, screener tools, and more with FundXLS.